Gujarat High Court
Mukesh Bhagubhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 13 July, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 14342 of 2020
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed Yes
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? Yes
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy No
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question No
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
MUKESH BHAGUBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TEJAS M BAROT(2964) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR MAUNISH T PATHAK(5892) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. DHAWAN JAYSWAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 13/07/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present application is filed for seeking following reliefs:
Page 1 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined "(A) HON'BLE COURT be pleased to pass appropriate order quashing impugned FIR No. 11191020201399 of 2020 registered with Vastrapur Police Station; (B) Pending admission herein and final disposal of present petition, HON'BLE COURT be pleased to stay further proceedings of FIR No. 11191020201399 of 2020 registered with Vastrapur Police Station; (C) For such other and further reliefs as may be deemed fit and proper."
2.1 Brief facts as per the case of the applicant in this application are as such that in the year 1987, the applicant, the owner of a Pharma Company married to one Jankiben. Subsequently, in 1988, the applicant and Jankiben had a daughter named Fizu i.e. first informant, respondent no. 2 herein. It is further the case of the applicant in this applicant that in the year 1993, the applicant and Jankiben got divorced in view of marital discord. Till Fizu- respondent no. 2 attained majority she was under the guardianship of the present applicant whereas, physical custody of respondent no. 2 remained with Jankiben, ex-wife of the present applicant. It is further the case of the applicant in this applicant that it Page 2 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined is required to be noted that all the expenses of Fizu till her marriage have been borne by the applicant. Respondent no. 2 got married with Maunang Patel in the year 2011. The applicant bore all expenses such as jewelry, clothing, etc. In the year 2012, from the wedlock of respondent no. 2 and Maunang, daughter Arya was born. Every year the applicant would give Rs. 1,00,000/- to respondent no. 2 for his granddaughter Arya. Though the applicant and Jankiben have been divorced for long, respondent no. 2 Fizu invited the applicant for all social occasions and events. The applicant and his daughter - Fizu, respondent no. 2 here have a healthy relation unaffected by the divorce of her parents. It is further the case of the applicant in this applicant that Arya was having her 8th birthday on 1.8.2020 and as usual the applicant along with other family members was invited. All the invitees were enjoying the party. Thereafter, the applicant went upstairs to take rest and after sometime, the applicant left for his home. 2.2 It is further the case of the applicant in this applicant that despite what is stated hereinabove, the respondent no. 2 filed the impugned FIR inter alia Page 3 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined alleging that the informant lives with her daughter Arya and her mother Jankiben. It is further alleged that in 2011, the informant married Maunang s/o. Ramanbhai Patel and from the said wedlock, daughter viz. Arya was born. It is further alleged that on 1.8.2020, on the occasion of Arya's birthday, the parents of the informant and others were invited for birthday party. It is further alleged that after the birthday party, the informant was sitting along with her mother viz. Jankiben. It is further alleged that the accused nos. 1 and 3 started taunting the informant that she did not bring anything from her parental home and she had married accused no. 2 for his money. It is further alleged that accused no. 1 and 3 instigated accused no. 2 to kick the informant out of the house and the informant was verbally abused. It is further alleged that the applicant was also present there and keeping grudge of the past, the present applicant was hurling abuses and instigating respondent no. 2's in laws to beat respondent no. 2 and her mother, in wake of which the in laws and husband of respondent no. 2 started abusing respondent no. 2 and her mother. It is further alleged that the accused no. 2 and the applicant came to the room where informant was present and both Page 4 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined the accused persons started verbally abusing the informant. It is further alleged that accused no. 1 assaulted the informant due to which, the informant sustained injuries and when her mother intervened, accused no. 1 also beat her up. It is further alleged that the present applicant did not intervene to save the informant. It is further alleged that the accused no. 2 pushed the informant, her daughter and her mother out of the house and the informant was further threatened. It is further alleged that the informant and her mother under went treatment. It is further alleged that the accused no. 2 used to inappropriately touch the informant. In this background, the impugned FIR came to be filed.
2.3 It is further the case of the applicant in this applicant that upon registration of the impugned FIR, the applicant being apprehensive of arrest, approached Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) for anticipatory bail. The said application came to be allowed vide order dated 21.8.2020. Hence, this petition is preferred.
Page 5 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Tejas Barot for the applicant, Mr. Dhawan Jayswal, learned APP for the respondent No.1 - State and Mr. Maunish T. Pathak, learned advocate for the respondent No.2.
4. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Tejas Barot has submitted that during the pendency of this matter, charge-sheet is filed and subsequently, the applicant has already availed the appropriate remedy available under the law by way of application for discharge, which was rejected by the learned trial court, and therefore, he has no other option but to proceed with the present matter. However, upon inquiry, it transpires that the order passed in the discharge application is not challenged by the applicant till today.
5.1 Learned advocate Mr. Tejas Barot has submitted that there is no prima facie offence established against the applicant as alleged in the complaint. He asserts that the applicant, being the father of the complainant, is falsely implicated in the present dispute, wherein essentially all the allegations are made against the in- laws. According to Mr. Barot, upon examining the F.I.R., Page 6 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined the only allegation made against the applicant is of instigating the in-laws and failing to rescue the complainant. The only other allegation that can be considered against the applicant is his use of abusive language towards the complainant. Therefore, Mr. Barot argues that if the complaint is read in its proper context, it becomes evident that no such incident as alleged actually took place. However, even assuming such an incident occurred, the applicant's involvement would not at the best exceeding Section 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
5.2 Mr. Barot further contends that considering the fact that the dispute primarily involves the in-laws of the complainant, the applicant, being the complainant's father, was falsely implicated in the litigation. 5.3 He has relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of G. Sagar Suri and Another versus State of U.P. and Others reported in (2000) 2 SCC 636, specifically, paragraph 7 is relevant and has submitted even this Court can exercise the powers at any stage irrespective of rejection of the discharge application, Page 7 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined which will not come in the way of this Court to exercise the powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. 5.4 Hence, he prays to allow the application by exercising the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana V/s Bhajan Lal reported in AIR 1992 SC 604. 6.1 Per contra, Mr. Maunish T. Pathak, the learned advocate for respondent No. 2 (the complainant), strongly opposes the prayers made in the present petition and the submissions made at the bar. He has drawn the Court's attention to the affidavit-in-reply filed by the complainant. He has annexed a copy of the order passed by the trial court at Exhibit 46 in Sessions Case No. 46 of 2021, wherein the trial court, in its order dated 21.4.2022, dismissed the discharge application filed by the applicant. Mr. Pathak has highlighted the relevant observations made by the trial court and argued that, upon reviewing the available evidence, the trial court found that the applicant called and sent threatening text messages to the complainant, indicating an intention to Page 8 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined harm her. The evidence presented prima facie establishes the involvement of the accused-applicant. 6.2 Furthermore, Mr. Pathak has emphasized that the charge-sheet has been filed, and specific roles have been attributed to the applicant. Considering that the applicant is the father of the complainant, his natural conduct should have been to protect his daughter if wrongdoings were being committed by the in-laws. However, the tenor of the F.I.R. suggests that the applicant played an active role in the commission of the offence by instigating the in-laws. Mr. Pathak argues that the Court should take a strict view of the matter, citing the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. versus State of Maharashtra and Others, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 315, particularly relevant is paragraph 80. 6.3 Mr. Pathak also informs the Court that due to the pendency of this matter and the applicant's non- cooperation in the trial court, the trial proceedings have not progressed. Therefore, he urges the Court not to exercise its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in cases where a prima facie offence is established. Page 9 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined
7. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, Mr. Dhawan Jaysaw, representing respondent No. 1 (the State), has also supported the arguments advanced by the learned advocate for respondent No. 2. He has submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed, and based on the material available on the record, more particularly the order passed in the discharge application, it is evident that the applicant played an active role in the commission of the offence. Therefore, he should face the trial before the concerned trial court. The Court should refrain from exercising the powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in cases where a prima facie offence is established, and such power should be exercised sparingly.
8.1 I have heard the learned advocates for the respective parties. I have considered the submissions made at the bar. I have also considered the materials available on the record.
8.2 While exercising the powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the Court is required to examine whether the offence alleged in the F.I.R. is prima facie made out Page 10 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined or not based solely on the bare reading of the F.I.R., and whether the continuation of further proceedings pursuant to the F.I.R. would amount to an abuse of the process of law. In this context, upon examining the materials available on the record, specifically the F.I.R., the complainant's affidavit-in-reply, the charge-sheet papers, and the order passed by the trial court, it becomes apparent that the applicant, who happens to be the father of the complainant, was present at the time of the incident which occurred at the complainant's matrimonial house. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that due to the divorce between the applicant's father and the complainant's mother, he holds a grudge against his daughter and her mother. Consequently, he instigated the in-laws of the complainant during the incident and also subjected both the complainant and her mother to verbal abuse 8.3 It was also alleged that despite being the father, he did not attempt to protect the complainant from the assault inflicted by her in-laws, specifically her husband. The trial court took this aspect into consideration when deciding the application for discharge. Furthermore, it is Page 11 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined evident from the available material that the applicant made phone calls and sent text messages to the complainant's mobile, threatening her with the statement, "I am going to kill tomorrow." In light of these factual circumstances, it is necessary to consider the following Sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 498A, 325, 323, 294B, 506(2), 354A, and 114.:
"Section 498A in The Indian Penal Code:-
498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.--Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation.--For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means--
(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.
Section 325 in The Indian Penal Code:- Page 12 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined
325. Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt.
--Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 323 in The Indian Penal Code:-
323. Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt.--
Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both. Section 294(b) in The Indian Penal Code:-
(b) sings, recites or utters any obscene song, ballad or words, in or near any public place, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine, or with both.
506. Punishment for criminal intimidation:-
Whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both;
Page 13 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc.--and if the threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by fire, or to cause an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or to impute unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both. Section 354 in The Indian Penal Code:-
354. Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty.--Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 114 in The Indian Penal Code:-
114. Abettor present when offence is committed.--
Whenever any person, who is absent would be liable to be punished as an abettor, is present when the act or offence for which he would be punishable in consequence of the abetment is committed, he shall be deemed to have committed such act or offence." Page 14 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined 8.4 Further, in the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. versus State of Maharashtra and Others reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 315, and more particularly para 80 is relevant, which is as under:
"80. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, our final conclusions on the principal/core issue, whether the High Court would be justified in passing an interim order of stay of investigation and/or "no coercive steps to be adopted", during the pendency of the quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and in what circumstances and whether the High Court would be justified in passing the order of not to arrest the accused or "no coercive steps to be adopted" during the investigation or till the final report/chargesheet is filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C., while dismissing/disposing of/not entertaining/not quashing the criminal proceedings/complaint/FIR in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, our final conclusions are as under:
i) Police has the statutory right and duty under the Page 15 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure contained in Chapter XIV of the Code to investigate into a cognizable offence;
ii) Courts would not thwart any investigation into the cognizable offences;
iii) It is only in cases where no cognizable offence or offence of any kind is disclosed in the first information report that the Court will not permit an investigation to go on;
iv) The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection, as it has been observed, in the 'rarest of rare cases (not to be confused with the formation in the context of death penalty).
v) While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of which is sought, the court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR/complaint;
vi) Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage;
Page 16 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined
vii) Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an exception rather than an ordinary rule;
viii) Ordinarily, the courts are barred from usurping the jurisdiction of the police, since the two organs of the State operate in two specific spheres of activities and one ought not to tread over the other sphere;
ix) The functions of the judiciary and the police are complementary, not overlapping;
x) Save in exceptional cases where non-interference would result in miscarriage of justice, the Court and the judicial process should not interfere at the stage of investigation of offences;
xi) Extraordinary and inherent powers of the Court do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whims or caprice;
xii) The first information report is not an encyclopaedia which must disclose all facts and details relating to the offence reported. Therefore, when the investigation by the police is in progress, the court should not go into the merits of the allegations in the FIR. Police must be permitted to complete the investigation. It would be premature to pronounce the Page 17 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined conclusion based on hazy facts that the complaint/FIR does not deserve to be investigated or that it amounts to abuse of process of law. After investigation, if the investigating officer finds that there is no substance in the application made by the complainant, the investigating officer may file an appropriate report/summary before the learned Magistrate which may be considered by the learned Magistrate in accordance with the known procedure;
xiii) The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very wide, but conferment of wide power requires the court to be more cautious. It casts an onerous and more diligent duty on the court;
xiv) However, at the same time, the court, if it thinks fit, regard being had to the parameters of quashing and the self-restraint imposed by law, more particularly the parameters laid down by this Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur (supra) and Bhajan Lal (supra), has the jurisdiction to quash the FIR/complaint;
xv) When a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by the alleged accused and the court when it exercises the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to consider whether the allegations in the FIR disclose Page 18 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined commission of a cognizable offence or not. The court is not required to consider on merits whether or not the merits of the allegations make out a cognizable offence and the court has to permit the investigating agency/police to investigate the allegations in the FIR; xvi) The aforesaid parameters would be applicable and/or the aforesaid aspects are required to be considered by the High Court while passing an interim order in a quashing petition in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, an interim order of stay of investigation during the pendency of the quashing petition can be passed with circumspection. Such an interim order should not require to be passed routinely, casually and/or mechanically. Normally, when the investigation is in progress and the facts are hazy and the entire evidence/material is not before the High Court, the High Court should restrain itself from passing the interim order of not to arrest or "no coercive steps to be adopted" and the accused should be relegated to apply for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. before the competent court. The High Court shall not and as such is not justified in passing the order of not to arrest and/or "no coercive steps" either during the investigation or till the investigation is completed Page 19 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined and/or till the final report/chargesheet is filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C., while dismissing/disposing of the quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. xvii) Even in a case where the High Court is prima facie of the opinion that an exceptional case is made out for grant of interim stay of further investigation, after considering the broad parameters while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India referred to hereinabove, the High Court has to give brief reasons why such an interim order is warranted and/or is required to be passed so that it can demonstrate the application of mind by the Court and the higher forum can consider what was weighed with the High Court while passing such an interim order. xviii) Whenever an interim order is passed by the High Court of "no coercive steps to be adopted"
within the aforesaid parameters, the High Court must clarify what does it mean by "no coercive steps to be adopted" as the term "no coercive steps to be adopted" can be said to be too vague and/or broad which can be misunderstood and/or misapplied."
8.5 Further, it will also be fruitful to mention the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State Page 20 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined of Haryana V/s Bhajan Lal reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed thus -
"In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Ch.XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Art.226 or the inherent powers under sec.482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and Page 21 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under sec.156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of sec.155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations
made in the FIR or complaint and the
evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under sec.156(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently Page 22 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
8.6 The judgment cited at the bar by learned advocate for the applicant is not helpful in the facts of the present case.
Page 23 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined 8.7 I am of the opinion that, based on the material available on the record, prima facie evidence establishes the involvement of the applicant in the commission of the offence, which needs to be examined during the trial. Therefore, I am not inclined to grant any relief by refraining from exercising the powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as the court's role is to determine whether a prima facie offence is established against the applicant solely based on a reading of the F.I.R. As discussed above, there are sufficient reasons to believe that a prima facie offence is established against the applicant, and therefore, no powers can be exercised under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the present case.
9. Accordingly, the present application is dismissed with no order as to costs.
10. However, while dismissing this application, this Court is of the opinion that, given the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, it is appropriate to direct the concerned Sessions Court to proceed with the proceedings of the trial, as expeditiously as possible, by Page 24 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14342/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/07/2023 undefined giving proper opportunity for all parties involved.
Notice stands discharged.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) DIWAKAR SHUKLA Page 25 of 25 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 21:21:14 IST 2023